Certification Questions

Date 12-16-2014 23:56

The is nothing in QC1 regarding a CWI providing training and then qualifying welders.

The only prohibition is for an Accredited Test Facility to have the same CWI provide both training and qualification for the same student.

I disagreed with the prohibition during the rewrite of QC47 (yet to be published). It was one of several objections I had, but I am no longer on that subcommittee.

My position was that if an individual CWI could not offer training and qualification to the student if he was operating as an ATF, the prohibition should also apply equally to the ATF that provides both training and qualification services.

If the fear is that a CWI could be compromised, why would it be any different for an AFT? Which has a greater financial interest is seeing the student pass the test, the CWI is making a few hundred dollars from the transaction or a ATF/training facility that stands to make thousands from the transaction?

Who has a greater interest in making the claim that their students have a high pass rate, an CWI that trains and test several welders in an industrial setting or a school that is selling their welding program to the geographic region that includes high schools, local industry, and government programs (grants)?

My opinion was in the minority.

Best regards - Al

By welderbrent (*****)

Date 12-16-2014 23:58 Edited 12-17-2014 00:01

Virtuoso,

WELCOME TO THE AWS WELDING FORUM!!

While I whole heartedly concur with your methods it is not a necessary dogmatic position. It will depend upon some other conditions which you can find explained by other CWI/instructors here by using the 'Search' function.

Basically, the same thing applies as when going from one employer to another, the cert does not belong to the welder and does not go with them. They re-qualify with the new company. So, when leaving a school, all that paper says is that you took a test and passed according to whoever tested it regardless of if they were a CWI. It can be a foot in the door but not really worth much. So, if you issued a "certification" document that says it is not for production then you stress that point.

Also, while I don't mean to degrade any instructors, a good many that I have been associated with did not have the practical work place application to properly inspect the coupon prior to bending and after bending and make code applicable decisions about the acceptance or rejection of the coupon. Just taking the CWI exam does not answer all the questions and most inspectors have a lot to learn before doing a correct job of qualifying welders per the applicable code (not just an instructor thing). Example: way too many new inspectors cut and bend a coupon even though the finished weld profile would not pass Table 6.1 and all the criteria in Clause 4 for visual inspection. If it doesn't pass visual, it doesn't pass, no need to cut and bend. I have seen many that would bend and were acceptable after being ground down to flush. But that is the 2nd step. If it doesn't meet the first criteria you don't go on.

It can be a slight conflict of interest position to be in as well as many instructors just want to show how successful the program and their instruction is by how many passing qualifications are issued. Edit: I do agree with Al on this point.

Not to mention that many schools are getting into the ATF program to also get a part of the "cash cow". They use school funds, private and public, to compete with private industry and do something that can be seen as questionable by those trying to make a living doing the same thing a mile down the road with all the expenses out of their own pocket. The issue has been raised but not really elevated to any extent thus far.

Okay, you have heard my opinion. Hopefully some of our instructors and other inspectors will chime in here.

He Is In Control, Have a Great Day, Brent

By Virtuoso Date 12-17-2014 03:25

Thanks so far for the info. I am talking certification from an ATF, yes. I work for an ATF.

I agree with you on lots of instructors and inspectors are very eager to cut up a test plate without inspecting it to see if it meets acceptance criteria. This is the main reason I am here looking for advice. It seems that visual inspection, staying within the procedure, lots of things don't mean much where I am. I am one that tries to stay out of other peoples business, but now it seems to be affecting me some. I don't do many certs as it is not my job. But I had to do four this week and I am being talked to in a funny way because I said one with a quarter inch of reinforcement was not going to fly. Almost like I am being expected to go along with the practices I've witnessed for nearly 10 years of tests like this being bent every week.

http://s1058.photobucket.com/user/virtuoso3/slideshow/

That side view is in fact a quarter lying on the plate.

I was trained as a welder at a place that was/is an ATF, and this was not something that went down. Does this happen elsewhere?

By welderbrent (*****)

Date 12-17-2014 03:56

Too often I'm afraid but on a percentage basis, not too bad overall. Still makes for a big problem. You probably would not be surprised, but I see people working in production, or 'for themselves' all the time that think they are pretty good and certified when they can't pass a test to save them if it is administered correctly.

Brent

By Virtuoso Date 12-17-2014 03:58

I'm quite familiar with all those guys who have jobs welding but can't weld. And I see these guys come in and test all the time with plates like these. Is it normal for testing facilities to pass plates like these?

By welderbrent (*****)

Date 12-17-2014 15:09

UUMMM. I thought I answered that in the wording of my last post, I don't think you could call it 'NORMAL'. But, it does happen and way too often.

Part of the question becomes how you want to define 'Testing Facilities'? If you mean ATF's, then it would be very uncommon. But still happens. Too little training of personnel at SOME of them. Hopefully they get it caught and taken care of at any audits. BUT...??? Who knows.

But, are you also including one man operation CWI's who qualify welders to make their living when you say 'Testing Facilities'? Then the numbers go up in my personal opinion and experience.

Now, there is a third class, Testing Companies who have a lot of good and expensive equipment and people who do everything from soils, to concrete, to welding, to ... you name it. They test it. RT, UT, MT, PT, Macro etching, bending, pulling, they do it. Most of them have very good reputations. They can make mistakes. They do hire new people and sometimes the learning curve lets less than perfect results happen.

If you want numbers, ratios, percentages, NOPE, can't and won't even try to GUESS. All I can say is IT HAPPENS. And once is too often in a perfect world. But even the codes acknowledge a less than perfect work environment. Look at arc strikes. They are to be avoided. Reference an article I wrote in IT about them a couple of years ago. The codes tell us how to deal with those occasions when the less than perfect happens. It does not strictly prohibit and make rejectable every piece that this happens to. If it did, we would never complete a building.

Bottom line, I would say, PLAINLY, IT IS NOT NORMAL. But, it happens.

He Is In Control, Have a Great Day, Brent

By kcd616

Date 12-22-2014 08:46

Bottom line, I would say, PLAINLY, IT IS NOT NORMAL. But, it happens.
reality, what concept :eek:

sincerely,
Kent

By Blaster (***)

Date 12-22-2014 06:28 Edited 12-22-2014 07:41

I have said this before, but here it is again. If there is a logical argument that an instructor shouldn't be testing his own students I would say it would more likely be because the instructor might tend to be significantly stricter than an "impartial" tester or the code criteria. The instructor has his personal reputation, and commonly the reputation of the training facility they manage, on the line with each person they issue papers to.

Personally my test criteria are much more strict than the minimum requirements of the standard we test to. But my criteria are clearly explained ahead of time, and are uniformly enforced. Additionally, the students aren't allowed to attempt testing until they have proven capable of performing on thinner materials, structural shapes, bevel grooves, U-grooves, fillet welds, positions, access limitations, etc that they would see in production work. Then they must pass a visual on a practice test with the tighter criteria, within an appropriate time limit. Then they can test for record. It is absolutely pointless to put a welding student out of a school with credentials who will fail on the job, and those with the most to lose are the instructor and the institution.

This is one of the reasons I don't test guys off the street or guys who don't fully complete our training.